Efficacy and safety of implantable cardiac defibrillators for treatment of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with cardiac sarcoidosis.

AIMS: Implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) implantation is a class IIA recommendation for patients with cardiac sarcoidosis (CS). However, little is known about the efficacy and safety of ICDs in this population. The goal of this multicentre retrospective data review was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ICDs in patients with CS. METHODS AND RESULTS: Electrophysiologists at academic medical centres were asked to identify consecutive patients with CS and an ICD. Clinical information, ICD therapy history, and device complications were collected for each patient. Data were collected on 235 patients from 13 institutions, 64.7% male with mean age 55.6 ± 11.1. Over a mean follow-up of 4.2 ± 4.0 years, 85 of 234 (36.2%) patients received an appropriate ICD therapy (shocks and/or anti-tachycardia pacing) and 67 of 226 (29.7%) received an appropriate shock. Fifty-seven of 235 patients (24.3%) received a total of 222 inappropriate shocks. Forty-six adverse events occurred in 41 of 235 patients (17.4%). Patients who received appropriate ICD therapies were more likely to be male (73.8 vs. 59.6%, P = 0.0330), have a history of syncope (40.5 vs. 22.5%, P = 0.0044), lower left ventricular ejection fraction (38.1 ± 15.2 vs. 48.8 ± 14.7%, P ≤ 0.0001), ventricular pacing on baseline electrocardiogram (16.1 vs. 2.1%, P = 0.0002), and a secondary prevention indication (60.7 vs. 24.5%, P < 0.0001) compared with those who did not receive appropriate ICD therapies. CONCLUSION: Patients with CS and ICDs are at high risk for ventricular arrhythmias. This population also has high rates of inappropriate shocks and device complications.

A small pericardial effusion is a marker of increased mortality.

OBJECTIVE: the study aimed to evaluate the prognostic importance of an incidental small pericardial effusion found on echocardiography. METHODS: we identified 10,067 consecutive patients undergoing echocardiography at 1 of 3 laboratories. Patients were excluded if they were referred for evaluation of the pericardium (n = 133), had cardiac surgery within the previous 60 days (n = 393), had a moderate or greater pericardial effusion (>1 cm if circumferential, n = 29), had no follow-up (n = 153), or had inadequate visualization of the pericardial space (n = 9). The Social Security Death Index was used to determine survival. RESULTS: a small pericardial effusion was noted in 534 (5.7%) of 9,350 patients. Compared to patients without a small effusion, those with an effusion were slightly older (68 ± 13 vs 67 ± 12 years, P = .02) and had a lower ejection fraction (52% vs 55%, P < .0001). Mortality at 1 year was greater for patients with a small effusion (26%) compared to those without an effusion (11%, P < .0001). After adjustment for demographics, medical history, patient location, and other echocardiographic findings, small pericardial effusion remained associated with higher mortality (hazard ratio 1.17, 95% CI 1.09-1.28, P = .0002). Of 211 with an effusion and follow-up echocardiography (mean 547 days), 136 (60%) had resolution, 63 (28%) showed no change, and 12 (5%) had an increase in size, although no patient developed a large effusion or cardiac tamponade. CONCLUSION: the presence of a small asymptomatic pericardial effusion is associated with increased mortality.

Association of Physician Specialty With Long-Term Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Complication and Reoperations Rates.

Background Patients undergoing implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantations have high rates of long-term device-related complications and reoperations. Whether physician specialty training is associated with differences in long-term outcomes following ICD implantation is unclear. Methods and Results We linked data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry with Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify physicians who performed ≥10 index ICDs from 2006 to 2009. We used data from the American Board of Medical Specialties to group the specialty of the implanting physician into mutually exclusive categories: electrophysiologists, interventional cardiologists, general cardiologists, thoracic surgeons, and other specialties. Primary outcomes were long-term device-related complications requiring reoperations or hospitalizations and reoperations for reasons other than complications. We compared the cumulative incidence rates and case-mix adjusted rates of long-term outcomes of index ICD implantations across physician specialties. Our analysis had a median follow-up of 47 months and included 107 966 index ICD implantations. Electrophysiologists had the lowest rates of incident long-term device-related complications (14.1%; interventional cardiologists, 15.3%; general cardiologists, 15.4%; thoracic surgeons, 16.4%; other specialists, 15.2%; P<0.001) and reoperations for reasons other than complications (electrophysiologists, 16.7%; interventional cardiologists, 17.0%; general cardiologists, 18.0%; thoracic surgeons, 18.4%; other specialists, 18.0%; P<0.001). Compared with patients whose ICDs were implanted by electrophysiologists, patients with implantations performed by nonelectrophysiologists were at higher risk of having long-term device-related complications (relative risk for interventional cardiologists: 1.16 [95% CI, 1.08-1.25]; general cardiologists: 1.13 [1.08-1.18]; thoracic surgeons: 1.20 [1.06-1.37]; all P<0.001, but not other specialists: 1.08 [0.99-1.17]; P=0.07). Compared to patients with implantations performed by electrophysiologists, patients with implantations performed by general cardiologists and thoracic surgeons were at higher risk of reoperation for noncomplication causes (relative risk for general cardiologists: 1.10 [1.05-1.15]; thoracic surgeons: 1.16 [1.00-1.33]; both P<0.05). Conclusions Patients with ICD implantations performed by electrophysiologists had the lowest risks of having long-term device-related complications and reoperations for noncomplication causes. Consideration of physician specialty before ICD implantation may represent an opportunity to minimize long-term adverse outcomes.

A 38-Year-Old Man With Obesity, Intermittent Tachycardia, and One Episode of Syncope.

A 38-year-old man with history of diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and obesity was referred to the electrophysiology clinic for evaluation of infrequent palpitations and remote history of syncope. The patient described a sensation of racing of the heart, which lasted about 30 min to 1 h and occurred several times over the past year. This was associated with a sense of anxiety and shortness of breath and appeared to resolve spontaneously. The patient also experienced one episode of syncope in the past while enjoying a barbecue on a hot summer day. He did not recall if this episode was accompanied by palpitations, however, the previously mentioned symptoms prompted the consultation. Upon further questioning the patient also reported experiencing fatigue. He stated that he noted decreased energy and frequent daytime sleepiness.

Outcomes of patients with definite and suspected isolated cardiac sarcoidosis treated with an implantable cardiac defibrillator.

PURPOSE: Cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) patients are at increased risk for sudden death. Isolated CS is rare and can be difficult to diagnose. METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective review, patients with CS and an implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) were identified. RESULTS: Of 235 patients with CS and ICD, 13 (5.5 %) had isolated CS, including 7 (3.0 %) with definite isolated CS (biopsy or necropsy-proven) and 6 (2.6 %) with suspected isolated CS based on a constellation of clinical, ECG, and imaging findings. Among 13 patients with isolated CS, 10 (76.9 %) were male, mean age was 53.8 ± 7.6 years, and mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 38.3 ± 16.5. Diagnosis was made by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) (n = 2), biopsy (n = 3), CMR and biopsy (n = 2), CMR and positron emission tomography (PET) (n = 2), PET (n = 1), late enhanced cardiac CT (n = 1), pathology at heart transplant (n = 1), and autopsy (n = 1). Eight of 13 (61.5 %) patients with isolated CS had a secondary prevention indication (VT in 6 and VF in 2) vs. 80 of 222 (36.0 %) with sarcoidosis in other organs (p = 0.04). Over a mean of 4.2 years, 9 of 13 (69.2 %) patients with isolated CS received appropriate ICD therapy, including anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP) and/or shock, compared with 75 of 222 (33.8 %) patients with cardiac and extracardiac sarcoidosis (p = 0.0150). Six of 7 (85.7 %) patients with definite isolated CS received appropriate ICD intervention, compared with 78 of 228 patients (34.2 %) without definite isolated CS (p = 0.0192.) CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study, patients with isolated CS had very high rates of appropriate ICD therapy. Prospective, long-term follow-up of consecutive patients with isolated CS is needed to determine the true natural history and rates of ventricular arrhythmias in this rare and difficult-to-diagnose disease.